PER CURIAM

Guez appealed from a judgment convicting him of forcible touching and harassment upon a jury verdict. It was alleged Guez was standing behind complainant, and placed his foot between her legs, while she was squatting restocking shelves at her place of employment, rubbing his foot against her vagina and buttock without her consent. Complainant called 911 several hours thereafter, a detective viewed surveillance video, and Guez was arrested. Guez argued on appeal the accusatory instrument was jurisdictionally defective as it lacked allegations he intended to abuse or degrade the victim, and the forcible touching conviction was not supported by legally sufficient evidence. The panel rejected Guez's claims finding the allegations of the factual portion of the information met the People v. Hatton requirements as an inference may be drawn Guez acted to degrade or abuse complainant since she did not consent to the act. Also, it found Guez's guilt of forcible touching was supported by legally sufficient evidence despite the jury finding him not guilty of sexual abuse, as evidence adduced at trial established he sought to degrade or abuse complainant by his acts. Thus, the judgment of conviction was affirmed.

PER CURIAM